Bottom balljoint, ex Luego wishbone kit.
Has anybody else experienced this kind of failure, I always thought that the balljoint was loaded the wrong way around (ie pulling it apart, as
opposed to compressing it)
Joint will have been on the road 3 yrs in July, but only 3k miles
Bottom ball joint failure
Ball joint closeup
Hi
Not that unusual if it is the kind that is assembled from above and crimped over. The better desighn ones are assembled from below so they can not
pull apart.
Identification wise if it has a domed bottom to the joint it is the crimped version. If it has a round but square profile it is the type assembled
from below. Far better desighn.
Cheers Matt
tbh looking at the pictures it appears it's the top one that has failed???
If it had failed, I'd have expected the rubber boot to be either sheared or popped off, how about a picture of the upper one?
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Whippy
tbh looking at the pictures it appears it's the top one that has failed???
I haven't actually seen it myself, yet. The photos are from No. 1 son.
From memory, the balljoints came from a Luego wishbones "package" and were Austin Maxi? I'm fairly certain that they are the crimped
version, I don't suppose there is an exact cross reference version for the "assembled for below" type?
Either way, I'm going to change both sides to the "assembled from below" type for safety's sake.
Any suggestions for one such balljoint to use
This occured whilst reversing to park, it could have been a lot worse if it had come apart whilst at speed
It certainly doesn't look "failed" to me, though it's sitting probably at the limit of it's articulation, and for that reason
alone would be worth replacing. If the tapered pin had sheared or the ball had popped out of the joint, the lower wishbone would be sitting on the
inside of the wheel rim.
Don't forget the failures that procomp will have seen will have been in track cars that are hopping over kerbs at high speed most of their life.
If these were a weak point on road cars I'm sure there would have been many more instances reported on here since so many kits use them.
[Edited on 11/5/09 by MikeRJ]
I'll see the top joint myself, tonight, but here is a 3rd photo, which seeems to show that the castor has increased with the wheel rolling
backward.
Photo taken from above the passenger side front wheel. If you imagine the whole stub axle assembly rotating clockwise, due to a loose or no joint at
the bottom, that would give the view in the photo, with the spring against the top wishbone. - Or so I imagine, I'll see tonight
ball joint failure from above
Hi
Ah no pictures my end just a cross in the square. So assumed it was the bottom.
Cheers Matt
id say its definately the top joint thats failed judging by the top picture - the top of the wheel has moved in a few inches.
If the bottom joint had failed if expect the car to be sat on the road.
I don't get that. The bottom of the upright is roughly where it should be in relation to the end of the bottom wishbone. The 1st picture shows the top of the wheel a lot further in than the NSF suggesting that it is a problem with the top joint. However, the point about the spring against the wishbone (or vice versa) is also valid (and slightly bizarre!)
i dont think its touching the spring, merely an illusion. Likewise the top bone isnt pointing back more than usual. Top joint is out (id guess the
nuts come off, but it might've twisted out under breaking), and the wheel is held there because the top bone is resting on the wheel itself, or
maybe the brake disc.
I want a prize if im right though! 
Has the top wishbone rear mounting gone? Can't see properly from the picture but the front one looks a bit twisted.
adrian
quote:
Originally posted by adithorp
Has the top wishbone rear mounting gone? Can't see properly from the picture but the front one looks a bit twisted.
adrian
from 1st pic i think its the top joint, if the uprights are siera which top hats are u using, central or offset taper.
i changed to cortina because of lack of articulation using sieara u/rs.
Definately not the bottom joint as it's still transfering that corner's weight and compressing your spring. As somebody else mentioned, if
the bottom BJ went, the end of your bottom wishbone would be scraping the floor or close to!
Also - if either BJ has gone and the upright moved, how could this have moved the top wishbone against the spring? Last time I checked the
coilover's weren't attached to the upright! 
. Either that top view picture is an illusion and the wishbone is not in contact with the
spring (although it does look pushed hard up against the damper body), or you must have wishbone movement. Maybe caused by the top joint failing and
the upright rotating backwards and smacking the wheel rim into the wishbone?
Dunno, can't wait to hear the verdict . And I hope it's nothing to serious 
.
Liam
Well, I've had a quick look and the top ball joint is OK. It's a Sierra hub with eccentric mushrooms. They haven't moved and the ball
joint is closed up and tight.
We pushed the car forwards under cover for the night, and when the steering was centred (it was half a turn away in the pictures) it all straightened
up. Very Strange.
The problem originally happened on full lock, when about to reverse, there was a loud bang and the wheel fell over, as in the pictures.
Straightening up the lock and pushing the car forward appears to get everything back into position.
When I get some time I'll take a jack and take the weight off the wheel and see what is loose. However, it still looks very much like the bottom
ball has pulled partly out.
Can anybody remember what the original ball joint type is, it was a Luego wishbone set for a Velocity XT. I seem to remember Austin Maxi?
Is there a better (as in cannot PULL out) alternative. I feel the need to change both sides.
[Edited on 11/5/09 by JohnN]
That photo makes me think the top rear wishbone mounting has failed. It could be the bracket being torn off the chassis or the chassis itself failing??? What ever it is, those mounting brackets aren't lined up anymore
Bottom wishbone rear inboard end come undone?
quote:
Originally posted by JohnNHowever, it still looks very much like the bottom ball has pulled partly out.
Dont see how you can still think it's the lower BJ?! For the wheel/upright to move that much the bottom BJ would have to have pulled apart
completely and moved a few inches. Yours hasn't even torn the rubber boot.
And that still doesn't explain your spring being hit. You absolutely must have a wishbone moving, and as the last two posts I'm going with
lower rear mount. It's either lost its bolt, the bracket has come off the chassis, or the bush tube has come off the bone.
I'll bet you a tenner
Going with the 3rd picture, my money is on the bottom rear pivot bolt having vacated the vehicle.
JB
Hi
Still can not see pictures. But it is worth noting that on some of the Luego's when they where setup with a decent amount of Castor the top
wishbone was very close to the spring. So much so it restricted it to the use of the smaller 1.9 Id springs rather than 2 1/4's.
Cheers Matt
Hi
Having just searched the web for photos of the two different desighn of the lower joint. Surprisingly i can only find pictures of the better desighn
type. Even the suppliers who supply the poor desighn type will not show pictures that will identify it as such. And some even use the picture of the
better desighn although supply the poor desighn.
Anyhow here is a pic of the BETTER designed one where the joint is assembled from below so as not to allow the joint to pull apart.
Description
[/img]
As i said earlier the POOR desighn ones have a domed bottom to them. Will try and get a picture later as i am sure i have one that has pulled out
somwhere.
Cheers Matt
what's the QH part number please
tony
quote:
Originally posted by mad-butcher
what's the QH part number please
tony
The Rally Design ones I purchased are the domed bottom ones, I don't want the things falling apart on me!
Cheers
David
Matt - the photos are also in his photo archive - can you see them there?
liam
Hi
Hooray got computer fully working.
Looking at those pictures it dose not look like anything has actualy broke as such. But looking at the alignment of the front and rear pivot bolts for
the top wishbone. They are not in alignment. Could be poor jigging but my gues would be that the chassis upright has bent. Especially if the outer
frame is of the type that is not supported by a diagonal going back to the bulkhead.
I would suggest running a straight edge down the inner face of the tube and along the edge of the outer frame and check for straightness as a starter.
Mind if that it the problem it should be quite visible to the naked eye.
PS i should also say that although i keep referring to the better and poorer designed joints. It should be said that the domed ( poorer ) joint is
still perfectly aceptable for use in the aplication. Just that is is not as well designed at the other version.
Cheers Matt
Hi
Just re read and the " loud bang " and wheel falling over dose not support my theory. Unless the whole sodding chassis upright parted
company.
Got me puzzled.
Cheers Matt
I to think the problem is with the lower arm rear bolt/ bracket area .
Just in case anybody were to miss the sequel to my earlier thread - I now have the answer, and its a bit of a worry.
Following Dusty's suggestion and I think later Rusty Nuts, I had No.1 son have a look at the bottom rear wishbone mount.
And guess what - it's torn the "U" bracket out of the chassis rail. So, that'll be a major repair. I haven't actually seen it
myself yet, just an iPhone picture. But I'm concerned that with the top torn out of the chassis rail, it may have also got bent.
Hey ho, I'll have to trailer it home and get the tig set out and think of some reinforcement in that area.
Here's the picture:
Suspension failure
Wow - doesn't the wall of the box section look thin - I'll get a measure on that asap
[Edited on 12/5/09 by JohnN]
It looks like it was never fully welded onto the chassis rail, has it torn the chassis rail at the other end of the bracket?
Shouldn't be too bad a job to fix that, though you may have to partially remove the side panel to get access. Time to check the other side
though!
[Edited on 12/5/09 by MikeRJ]
Hi
Unbelievable that a manufacturer would only weld the bracket on 2 or 3 sides.
Tubing thickness is where virtually all chassis manufacturers are not paying attention these days. All the tubing that is supplied these days is down
on MIN tolerance IE 16g will actualy be 17 1/2 g. These days you have to ask for certificated tubing when ordering to get what you actualy asked for.
Or order a gauge size up IE order 14g to get 16 1/2 g tubing.
It is perfectly aceptable to build the chassis out of 17 1/2g - 18g as many of the race chassis are. But it requires a bit more attention to detail
and bracing. Something that is lacking in many of today's chassis. And is starting to show espesialy as more and more people are using there cars
for trackdays with sticky tyres fitted to them.
Maybe this is a bit of a reminder to all of us that it realy dose pay to give the car both mechanically and the chassis a good looking over a bit more
often than just prior to the MOT.
Cheers Matt
quote:
Originally posted by procomp
Hi
Unbelievable that a manufacturer would only weld the bracket on 2 or 3 sides.
Cheers Matt
Hi John
I'm probably almost as concerned as you about this as I have a similar chassis.
I note that it broke when on full lock and in reverse gear, I presume then at very low
speed and not bumping up a kerb or suchlike?
Full lock does exert a lot of force into the bones.
When I push mine in and out of the garage I can hear the tyres scrubbing.
I also note it was welded as 4 stitches, not weld all round, and the box does look thin
but photo's can be deceptive.
My own chassis is a +4, wide nose & book length w/bones.
Is yours a 442, and does that mean standard width nose and long w/bones?
Long bones (if you have them) do increase the force on the chassis and the mounts
simply by the law of leavers.
I sincerely hope you find the problem cause and engineer a suitable solution.
Cheers
Paul G
What grade of stainless was used? I'm sure Paul will know a lot more about this than most, but I believe some grades can become very brittle around welds without post heat treatment?
Just to clarify. This isn't a Luego chassis, its a self built stainless 442 chassis, with Luego sourced wishbones (Velocity XT).
I am at fault for not fully welding the bracketry (when it was far more easily accessible ) Now I'll have to check all the bracket welding. I
did all the original chassis welding by tig, (which was sometimes more difficult to do into the root under the curve of the bracket in awkward
locations). However, I now also have a mig, so the additional, less accessible welding should be easier to accomplish - I hope.
PaulG, yes, as a stainless chassis, there has always been concern expressed for potential stress related brittle failure. I believe that's what
I've now experienced, and I guess largely as a result of not fully welding the "U" bracket and allowing small flexing to work harden
the local area and a crack to develop from the end of a weld bead.
I suspect that the crack has been there for a small while, and that reversing and braking whilst travelling backward on full lock, provided the pull
on the joint that finally tore the metal.
Thanks for all the observations, diagnoses etc, now I need to get my hands dirty again, and quickly, I'm wasting tax, insurance and driving fun
now.
quote:
Originally posted by JohnN
stainless chassis
